Energy, and How to Get It
newyorker.com
newyorker.com
I realized that I was waiting to have energy before doing something. Blaming my lack of action on a lack of energy.
But energy -- of the vim and vigor variety -- is not a tank that you must fill before you can use it. It's a choice. It is in fact _created by action_. It's getting up and making things happen even when your tank is empty.
And this doesn't happen by shaming yourself or hating yourself for not being that person. It happens by choosing to be that person. It happens by making that part of your identity.
So no, there is no magic pill. No external thing that will turn you into that energizer bunny type who seems unstoppable. Other than the realization that you choose who you are every moment. So why wouldn't you be the best version of yourself that you can be?
Yes, of course, exercise, eat healthy, drink in moderation, get enough sleep, and manage your stress. All of those help. In fact they're all part of the same choice of who you want to be.
You are not your situation, your possessions, your achievements, or your past. You are your choices and your actions in the present. Think about the kind of person you admire -- their qualities and their actions. Then _be that person_. Choose to make that a core part of your identity. Not your past choices or your past actions, but who you are _right now_.
Realizing this and making that choice may be one of the most energizing moments of your life. It's free and available to everyone. No prescription required.
If you want to start understanding motivation and reward, simply look at the function of mu-opioid agonism in relation to the NAcc and related dopamine task reward circuitry.
But I do of course agree it's a good philosophy to recognize you can choose to act in accordance with who you want to be, insofar as it is possible. And at the same, to work to chance your circumstances to expand your possibilities about who you can be.
If you are physically exhausted from your work, you almost certainly exercised enough during that work to be in good physical health. The health problems of low income people are almost always caused primarily by nutritional issues (too much food, too little, or not the right variety, depending on the context).
People love to bring up edge cases but most people on that situation aren’t on Hacker News.
Vast majority of audience here is in a position to improve their energy.
And I’ve had health and digestive issues that impair me more than average. Guess what? By controlling my environment and inputs I can have a massive difference in my own average energy levels
> it's simply not possible to choose to be positive, for instance
I fundamentally disagree with this statement. There’s always a choice. Do you speak from experience or are you assuming what others with worse physical challenges than you must logically feel?
(I draw a distinction here between acute and chronic issues. If your spouse has just died or you just broke your leg and are in excruciating pain, positivity has little role. I’m talking about longer run)
So very true in my experience with any creative pursuit I've attempted. As others have mentioned, there is a real local maxima that must be overcome, but once you climb the hill and enter the mindset of "getting the thing done", the burst of energy can be so unrelenting until the task is complete. Forcing yourself to this mindset seems like a great approach to me. I still personally need little tricks and triggers to remind myself that 'this', whatever 'this' is, is what I've chosen to do though.
>You are not your situation, your possessions, your achievements, or your past. You are your choices and your actions in the present. Think about the kind of person you admire -- their qualities and their actions. Then _be that person_. Choose to make that a core part of your identity. Not your past choices or your past actions, but who you are _right now_.
I've come to a somewhat similar conclusion. To channel my inner Horowitz, I offer an excerpt from Death Grips' - "Lord of The game".
"Fuck where you're from Fuck where you're goin' It's all about where you're at"
The present moment is all we really have, and attempts to perfect it are very high yield in my opinion.
This is the whole "excellence isn't an act but a habit" thing, usually attributed to Aristotle.
I found it easier to get up early and go to the gym when I realized I'm going to feel like shit in the morning no matter what, so I might as well just get up and go. When I was childless and care-free I would skip if I had one too many beers the night before, a tiring weekend, or just didn't feel "100%". This change in lifestyle made me realize there never was a "100%". Now maybe the exercise gives me a small boost in energy, but most importantly I'm conditioning myself to push myself towards my goals regardless of how much energy I think I have.
Did this assignment have a minimum word count? I know it's the New Yorker, but gah I couldn't handle it
Or is this a situation where they flaunt common practice to be quirky, like their superfluous umlauts?
I really hear it a lot since my wife works in the medical field, but I heard it used quite often before that.
If you go for both, there's no question!
(I love how that last one is even in my browser's spell checker)
Their feature pieces are like novellas of non-fiction. Many get republished into books, that receive acclaim like the amazing Coming into the Country[1].
It doesn't skim as well as some business insider article that is just a list of bullet points, but it was never meant to.
https://www.amazon.ca/Coming-into-Country-John-McPhee/dp/037...
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1977/06/20/coming-into-th...
Most people (without serious medical issues) moaning about a lack of energy know exactly what's causing it but refuse to change their habits. Whether it's drinking, smoking, junk food, staying up late, etc. they've just become too attached to that way of living.
The article wastes a lot of words on basically nothing.
Put another way: everything is nature, nurture and “random”. It’s rare to find an outcome where one of those three completely dominates the causal equation.
To state my original point in a potentially clearer way: I suspect there is significant genetic variation in energy, controlling for lifestyle habits. Evidence: 1) Personal observation over years of interest in this topic 2) the fact that there is extensive variation in most quantitative life outcomes, controlling for lifestyle habits
That said, for anybody in a nice city with enough bike lanes, I cannot stress how nice bike commute is for your life. Saving money, time[0], mental energy while restoring health. That a fractal silver bullet for you.
[0] everytime I tried going to work by car or bus, I left home earlier, arrived late at work, and had to pay for gas or tickets. Insane
It is very important to remember that your energy is yours. Almost the essence of what you are. You will have the occasional good day, or just good hour, and that is the opportunity to build. Maybe with unhealthy amounts of coffee, to kickstart. Then two good hours the next day. Then four.
It will necessarily take many calendar weeks, but I implore any discouraged readers to understand that it is possible to bootstrap up to a better place.
I never really feel like I have plenty of energy, because whatever I have I just use to do more stuff :/
Curious to hear what worked for you.
Definition of low energy levels in this context:
* struggles to work more than 20 hours a week without spending the rest of each day and the weekend recuperating.
* does not notice any significant differences in energy levels from a healthy diet, regular exercise, and achieving a healthy BMI. (That's not to say there isn't a difference, but it's small and can result in more consistent energy flow - the overall energy level is still low and recuperation is often strongly desired, feeling of fatigue is still constant)
If you can take a month off and see a doctor I'd recommend it. The faster you can get ahead of this type of thing the better.
In not making a judgement on that, but unfortunately the last 2 years hasn't been full of news stories of zoom meetings to discuss happiness and the good times...
I remember before Covid when the news was wall-to-wall positivity.
It doesn't have a conclusion, so I'll add one. The article supports it as supported much as any other conclusion (You get a Bayesian update! And you get a Bayesian update!) but it's the one I believe and this little box is /my/ journalistic output:
If you want better energy, you need to try a ton of things. Get ideas from the many gurus past and present, try to figure out a few measures that are not /completely/ subjective (but accept it's not physics) and just /keep trying/. The right answer will change over time, so it's a never-ending cycle. If you have an explanation for that, I'd love to hear it.
But please don't give up, and don't be afraid to feel silly because you're trying last year/decade's fad instead of this one. It's worth it.
Writers should always write for the reader.
That said, I also skipped over tons of passages, for example, the laundry list of energy supplements. I read for different reasons on my phone, compared to when I’m reading a physical copy of the New Yorker. On my phone, I’m rapidly skimming tons of articles searching for interesting facts, which just isn’t suited for reading the New Yorker’s beautiful long-form style.
There's a funny irony here in your suggestion that the New Yorker writers have, in a sort of solipsistic error, forgotten to write for anyone but themselves. In fact, I'd suggest that it's you who have forgotten that not everyone (even on HN, it would seem) shares your tastes!
That's not to say that this piece is an ideal example of the craft. But there will be plenty of readers who appreciate it.
How do mitochondria evolve if they are just clones passed down from mothers? Or rather, how come there are not huge differences between populations of people whose mitochondria evolved in different direction but can never mix?